1. Multiple Brane Dynamics: D-Branes to M-Branes Neil Lambert King’s College London Annual UK Theory Meeting Durham 18 December 2008 Up from String Theory

2. Plan How Particle Physicists View the World What is String Theory? What is M-theory? What are D-branes? What about M-branes? Conclusions

3. Standard Model GUT scale LHC Quantum Gravity How Particle Physicists View the World

4. String Theory seems capable of describing all that we expect in one consistent framework: –Quantum Mechanics –Standard Model-like gauge theory –General Relativity –Cosmology (inflation)

5. What is String Theory? I DUNNO OKAY. WHAT WOULD THAT IMPLY? STRING-THEORY SUMMARIZED I JUST HAD AN AWESOME IDEA. SUPPOSE ALL MATTER AND ENERGY IS MADE OF TINY,VIBRATING “STRINGS” Well in fact we know an awful lot

6. (perturbative) quantum field theory assumes that the basic states are point- like particles –Interactions occur when two particles meet:

7. Point particles are replaced by 1- dimensional strings –Multitude of particles correspond to the lowest harmonics of an infinite tower of modes

8. Feynman diagrams merge and become smooth surfaces Only one coupling constant: g s - Vacuum expectation value of a scalar field – the dilaton Φ

9. A remarkable feature is that gravity comes out of the quantum theory, unified with gauge forces The dimension of spacetime is 10 Must compactify to 4D There appear to be a plethora of models with Standard Model-like behaviour –Estimated 10 500 4D vacua Landscape

10. What is M-Theory? M-THEORY OKAY. WHAT WOULD THAT IMPLY? M-THEORY SUMMARIZED I JUST HAD AN AWESOME IDEA. SUPPOSE THE 5 STRING THEORIES ARE REALLY ALL ASPECTS OF ONE THEORY

11. There are in fact 5 possible string theories But now they are all thought to be related as different aspects of single theory: M-theory How? Duality Two theories are dual if they describe the same physics but with different variables. e.g. S-duality g s ↔ 1/g s

12. The classic example of duality occurs in Maxwell’s equations without sources: –‘electric’ variables: –‘magnetic’ variables: Self-dual d F = 0 d ? F = 0 F = d A d ? d A = 0 F = ? d A D d ? d A D = 0

13. M-theory moduli space:

14. at strong coupling 10D

15. M-theory moduli space in 3D: X 11

16. So how does one get from 11D to 10D Compactification Suppose that one dimension is a circle Shrinking X 11 X X 11

17. We can Fourier expand all fields Then is a 10D field with mass n 2 /R 2 : So all modes except become very massive and decouple as R→0 Ã n r 2 11 ª = r 2 10 ª + @ 2 11 ª Ã 0 r 2 11 Ã n = r 2 10 Ã n ¡ n 2 R ¡ 2 Ã n m2m2 ª ( X ; X 11 ) = P 1 n = ¡ 1 Ã n ( X ) e i n X 11 = R

18. An 11D metric tensor becomes a 10D metric tensor plus a vector and a scalar Scalar that controls the size of the 11 th dimension Electromagnetic vector potential 10D metric g mn = µ g ¹º A º A ¹ © 2 ¶

19. Thus the String Theory dilaton Φ has a geometric interpretation as the size of the 11 th dimension –But the vacuum expectation value of Φ is g s –String perturbation theory is an expansion about a degenerate 11 th dimension –As g s ∞ an extra dimension opens up 11D theory in the infinite coupling limit. Predicts a complete quantum theory in eleven dimensions: M-theory –Effective action is 11D supergravity [Cremmer,Julia Sherk] –Little else is known

20. What are D-branes? YANG-MILLS THEORIES OKAY. WHAT WOULD THAT IMPLY? D-BRANES SUMMARIZED I JUST HAD AN AWESOME IDEA. SUPPOSE IN ADDITION TO STRINGS THERE ARE ALSO VIBRATING D-BRANES

21. In addition to strings, String Theory contains D-branes: –p-dimensional surfaces in spacetime 0-brane = point particle 1-brane = string 2-brane = membrane etc…. –Non-perturbative states: Mass ~ 1/g s –End point of open strings

22. These open strings give dynamics to the D- brane At lowest order the dynamics are those of U(n) Super-Yang-Mills

23. –g YM is determined from g s –Light modes on the worldvolume arise from the open strings (Higg’s mechanism) mass = length of a stretched string between the branes m

24. At low energy D-branes appear as (extremal) charged black hole solutions –Singularity is extended along p-dimensions Thus D-branes have both a Yang-Mills description as well as a gravitational one –Exact counting of black hole microstates –AdS/CFT

25. What about M-branes? I DUNNO OKAY. WHAT WOULD THAT IMPLY? M-BRANES SUMMARIZED I JUST HAD AN AWESOME IDEA. SUPPOSE THAT M-THEORY ALSO HAS INTERACTING NONABELIAN M-BRANES Well in fact we now know something

26. Type IIA String Theory M-Theory 0-Branesgravitational wave along X 11 Strings 2-branes 4-branes 5-branes 6-BranesKaluza-Klein monopoles 2-branes 5-branes

27. Type IIA String Theory M-Theory 0-Branesgravitational wave along X 11 Strings 2-branes 4-branes 5-branes 6-BranesKaluza-Klein monopoles 2-branes 5-branes

28. Type IIA String Theory M-Theory 0-Branesgravitational wave along X 11 Strings 2-branes 4-branes 5-branes 6-BranesKaluza-Klein monopoles 2-branes 5-branes purely gravitational excitations The branes of M-theory

29. So there are no strings in M-theory –2-branes and 5-branes In particular no open strings and no g s –No perturbative formulation –No microscopic understanding or even a definition The dynamics of a single M-branes act to minimize their worldvolumes –With other fields related by supersymmetry M2 [Bergshoeff, Sezgin, Townsend] M5 [Howe, Sezgin][Howe, Sezgin, West]

30. In string theory you can derive the dynamics of multiple D-branes from symmetries: –Effective theory has 16 supersymmetries and breaks SO(1,9) → SO(1,p) x SO(9-p) –This is in agreement with maximally supersymmetric Yang-Mills gauge theory L = ¡ 1 4 g 2 YM T r ( F ^ ? F ) ¡ 1 2 T r ( DX ) 2 + i 2 T r ( ¹ ª¡ ¹ D ¹ ª ) + i T r ( ¹ ª [ X ; ª ]) ¡ T r ([ X ; X ]) 2

31. Can we derive the dynamics of M2-branes from symmetries? –Conformal field theory Strong coupling (IR) fixed point of 3D SYM –No perturbation expansion –The only maximally supersymmetric Lagrangians are Yang-Mills theories Wrong symmetries for M-Theory need SO(1,2) x SO(8) not SO(1,2) x SO(7)

32. Can we derive the dynamics of M2-branes from symmetries? –Conformal field theory Strong coupling (IR) fixed point of 3D SYM –No perturbation expansion –The only maximally supersymmetric Lagrangians are Yang-Mills theories Wrong symmetries for M-Theory need SO(1,2) x SO(8) not SO(1,2) x SO(7) Well that turns out not to be true

33. The Yang-Mills theories living on D-branes are determined by the susy variation Here we find a Lie-algebra with a bi-linear anti- symmetric product: Closure of the susy algebra leads to gauge symmetry: Consistency of this implies the Jacobi identity: ± ª = ¡ ¹ ¡ i D ¹ X i ² + [ X i ; X j ] ¡ ij ¡ 10 ² + ::: [ ¢ ; ¢ ] : A ­ A ! A ± X i = [ ¤ ; X i ] [ ¤ ; [ X ; Y ]] = [[ ¤ ; X ] ; Y ] + [ X ; [ ¤ ; Y ]]

34. What is required for M2-branes? –Now and so we require –Thus we need a triple product: 3-algebra –Closure implies a gauge symmetry: –Consistency requires a generalization of the Jacobi identity (fundamental identity) ¡ 012 ² = ² ¡ 012 ª = ¡ ª [ ¢ ; ¢ ; ¢ ] : A ­ A ­ A ! A ± ª = ¡ ¹ ¡ i D ¹ X i ² + [ X I ; X J ; X K ] ¡ IJK ² ± X = [ X ; A ; B ] [ A ; B ; [ X ; Y ; Z ]] = [[ A ; B ; X ] ; Y ; Z ] + [ X ; [ A ; B ; Y ] ; Z ] + [ X ; Y ; [ A ; B ; Z ]]

35. This gives a maximally supersymmetric Lagrangian with SO(8) R-symmetry [Bagger,NL] ‘twisted’ Chern-Simons gauge theory Conformal, parity invariant L = ¡ 1 2 T r ( D ¹ X I ; D ¹ X I ) + i 2 T r ( ¹ ª ; ¡ ¹ D ¹ ª ) + i 4 T r ( ¹ ª ; ¡ IJ X I X J ª ) ¡ 1 12 T r ([ X I ; X J ; X K ]) 2 ¡ L CS L CS » T r ( A ^ d ~ A + 2 3 A ^ ~ A ^ ~ A )

36. But it turns out to only have one example: –a,b,c,d = 1,2,3,4 SU(2)xSU(2) Chern-Simons at level (k,-k) and matter in the bi-fundamental Vacuum moduli space: Two M2-branes in R 8 /Z 2 –agrees with M-theory when k=2 [ T a ; T b ; T c ] = 2 ¼ k " a b c d T d integer M k = ( R 8 £ R 8 )= D 2 k M 2 = ( R 8 = Z 2 £ R 8 = Z 2 )= Z 2

37. Need to generalize: –Weak coupling arises from orbifold –Consider C 4 /Z k –12 susys and breaks SO(8) →SU(4)xU(1) Look for theories with SU(4)xU(1) R- symmetry and N=6 supersymmetry 0 B B @ Z 1 Z 2 Z 3 Z 4 1 C C A » 0 B B @ ! ! ! ¡ 1 ! ¡ 1 1 C C A 0 B B @ Z 1 Z 2 Z 3 Z 4 1 C C A ! = e 2 ¼ i = k

38. From the 3-algebra this is achieved if the triple product is no longer totally anti-symmetric: Consistency requires the fundamental identity Explicitly we can take: Resulting action is similar to the N=8 case: –U(n)xU(n) Chern-Simons theory at level (k,-k) with matter in the bifundamental [ X ; Y ; ¹ Z ] = ¡ [ Y ; X ; ¹ Z ] X,Y,Z are Complex Scalar Fields [ X ; Y ; ¹ Z ] = 2 ¼ k ( XZ y Y ¡ YZ y X ) M k ; n = S ym n ( R 8 = Z k )

39. These theories were was first proposed by [Aharony, Bergman, Jafferis and Maldacena] They gave a brane diagram derivation –Consider the following Hannay-Witten picture

40. In terms of the D3-brane SYM worldvolume theory: –Integrating out D5/D3-strings and flowing to IR gives a U(n)xU(n) CS theory with level (k,- k) coupled to bi-fundamental matter –N=3 is enhanced to N=6

42. The final configuration is just n M2s in a curved background preserving 3/16 susys. –Metric can be written explicitly –smooth except where the centre's intersect –near horizon limit gives n M2's in R 8 /Z k. –Preserved susy's are enhanced to 12/16. Note that this works for all n and all k –even k=1,2 where we expect N=8 susy Two supersymmetries are not realized in the Lagrangian (strongly coupled)

43. How does one recover D2-branes from this [Mukhi, Papageorgakis] –Give a vev to a scalar field – become a dynamical SU(2) gauge field Similar to a Higg’s effect – v = h X 8 4 i L = k L 0 ( X I 4 ) + k v 2 L SU ( 2 ) ( X I 6 = 8 a 6 = 4 ; A ¹ ) + O ( k v ¡ 3 ) X 8 a 6 = 4 g 2 YM = v 2 = k

44. What can we learn about M-theory? –Hints at microscopic dynamics of M-branes e.g. in the N=8 theory one finds mass = area of a triangle with vertices on an M2

45. Mass deformations give fuzzy vacuua: –M2-branes blow up into fuzzy M5-branes –Can we learn about M5-branes Also M2s can end on M5’s: Chern-Simons gauge fields become dynamical [ Z A ; Z B ; ¹ Z B ] = m B A Z B

46. There are also infinite dimensional totally antisymmetric 3-algebras: Nambu bracket –Related to M5-branes? –Intuitive picture of the d.o.f. ~ n 3/2 Infinitely many totally anti-symmetric 3- algebras with a Lorentzian metric –Seem to be equivalent to 3D N=8 SYM but with manifest SO(8) and conformal symmetry [ X ; Y ; Z ] = ? ( d X ^ d Y ^ d Z ) Functions on a 3-manifold

47. Conclusions I hope to have given a flavour of String Theory and M-Theory D-branes are a central to String Theory –Dynamics determined by Yang-Mills gauge theory M-branes are poorly understood but there has been much recent progress: –Complete proposal for the effective Lagrangian of n M2’s in R 8 /Z k –Novel highly supersymmetric Chern-Simons gauge theories based on a 3-algebra.